backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 136 comment(s) - last by ajcoyote.. on Apr 2 at 11:12 PM

  (Source: Lightning Car Company)

  (Source: Lightning Car Company)
LCC hopes to crush gasoline rivals with the 700 HP Lightning GT

Advanced battery technology is becoming a commonplace in today's energy efficient vehicles. Today's hybrid vehicles make use of nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries and hybrids with advanced lithium-ion batteries will be hitting U.S. roads within the coming months.

Lithium-ion batteries are also finding their way into all-electric vehicles like the Tesla Roadster and the Fisker Hybrid Premium Sports Sedan (HPSS). The Tesla roadster can sprint to 60 MPH in 5.7 seconds and reach a top speed of 130 MPH. The Fisker HPSS, on the other hand, will go 0-60 MPH in 5.8 seconds while its top speed is pegged at 125 MPH.

It looks as though another all-electric vehicle is about to enter the fray -- Lightning Car Company (LCC) last week unveiled its Lightning GT. The British car company said that at least one model of its Lightning GT will have roughly 700 HP available on tap from a Hi-Pa Drive electric powertrain (consisting of four 120 kW permanent magnet brushless motors) and 36 kW NanoSafe battery system -- torque figures should also be quite lofty for the vehicle given the intense twisting force available with electric motors.

The high-performance version of the Lightning GT will dash to 60 MPH in less than 4 seconds. LCC claims that a less powerful, extended-range model will have a driving range of 250 miles -- expect the range for the 700 HP version to be far less.

The sleek Lightning GT will feature a lightweight body constructed of Kevlar composites and carbon fiber. The vehicle features a tubular spaceframe backbone chassis, while 20" cast aluminum wheels connect to the independent front and rear suspension.

LCC is currently taking £15,000 ($30,000 USD) deposits for those looking to get their hands on a Lightning GT. The full price for the vehicle is reported to be in the $300,000 USD range -- about three times that of the Tesla Roadster.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Tesla
By Desslok on 3/10/2008 3:34:21 PM , Rating: 2
Has Tesla even built one production car yet? I know they were supposed to build a production plant in New Mexico but I am pretty sure that is dead in the water.




RE: Tesla
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/10/2008 3:37:02 PM , Rating: 3
The Tesla Roadster already passed federal crash tests (see link in the article) and is scheduled to begin production next week:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/environment/20...


RE: Tesla
By Xerio on 3/10/2008 3:51:46 PM , Rating: 4
From the USA Today article referenced above:
quote:
Tesla is being touted as the first of a wave of electric cars that will bring the most profound change in the auto industry since the first Model T rolled off Ford Motor's (F) assembly line 100 years ago. From Toyota (TM) to General Motors, (GM) the quest for clean air and independence from foreign oil is leading to the wall socket.
Do people not realize how most of the electricity in the U.S. is generated?

“Woo hoo! I am saving the world! Let’s plug my car into my wall socket, the magic energy source!”?


RE: Tesla
By gamefreak32 on 3/10/2008 3:59:45 PM , Rating: 4
I asked this same question to one of my engineering teachers. The idea is to have them plugged in at night. The power plants produce the same amount of electricity throughout the day and at night most of the electricity goes unused. Since electricity can not be stored, is is more efficient.


RE: Tesla
By Xerio on 3/10/2008 4:11:14 PM , Rating: 2
The problem with that is getting people to only charge their cars at night.

Fortunately, that is when most cars are hanging around in garages, but still. Banking on the assumption that people will only charge their cars at night is not reason enough to say that we are polluting the world less by using electric cars. Now, if there were more nuclear and solar plants than there are coal/petroleum/natural gas plants, then I would recommend everyone go out and buy an electric car. Otherwise, whether you drive electric or gasoline powered vehicles you are still polluting and using fossil fuels.


RE: Tesla
By Motley on 3/10/2008 5:20:47 PM , Rating: 5
No, they are banking on the assumption that the majority of cars will be able to be charged at night. It doesn't need to be an all or nothing proposition. Also, once cars switch from gas to electric, it will be much easier to implement solar/hydro/wind/nuclear power plants.

Once that happens the electic companies can then use whatever source is most efficient and/or economical. The whole country could literally switch from gas to coal to nuclear to fusion without consumers needing to do anything at all, or even at the flip of a switch (A very large one). For example, say there is a large coal mine that suddenly stops producing coal (for whatever reason). The electric companies could turn to their nuclear/hydro/solar plants to help soften the blow. Right now, if the price of oil goes up, you pay for it at the gas pump. No matter how much cheaper the alternatives might be.


RE: Tesla
By EglsFly on 3/11/2008 1:02:40 AM , Rating: 2
Electric cars / Electric Hybrid cars are what we need!

The most important aspect is it will reduce our dependency on foreign oil.
Our Electricity coming from Nuclear, Coal, Hydro, Natural Gas, Solar, Wind, etc... All together this combination reduces our oil consumption. These plants are much more efficient at producing power than internal combustion engines on cars and pollute less.
In addition, it is much cheaper to fuel/power these cars with electricity from the grid, than it is purchasing gasoline. The hurdle being that they need to get the initial purchase price down. This will happen as technology continues to advance and volume goes up.

You can take whatever angle you want, whether its less pollution, or less oil consumption, cheaper fuel/power, either way, these type of cars are a better solution than what we currently have.

Personally I am looking forward to seeing the Chevrolet Volt enter production in the next 2 years. Check out the video:
http://www.youtube.com/v/8tRIstJeOGQ


RE: Tesla
By ineedaname on 3/11/2008 2:16:44 PM , Rating: 2
EglsFly is right on the dot. I always see people complaining how hybrid/electric cars do not save the environment and what not. I would consider myself an environmentalist myself but the viewpoint above isn't what's important. What's important is getting off from OIL. The point is to have an alternative. Gas prices are going up and its not stopping until we run out of oil. Not to mention all the carbon emissions from it.

Many environmental fanatics like my geography prof are just too extreme and only look at the environmental impact without considering the position a company has to take. You can't just expect a car company to mass produce hydrogen cars out of nowhere. That would mean taking a HUGE risk of going out of business. There are many factors such as pleasing shareholders that means it is not possible to take such risks. There needs to be steps to facilitate the transition. A lot of infrastructure has to be put in before other options can be viable.

By having electric cars available it would create demand for companies to find better and cleaner ways to produce energy. Its hard for companies to push these things when the demand is so low. It may also create opportunities for hydrogen cars to peer in later on. Without these baby steps, reaching a later environmentally friendly solution is near impossible.

So you can call it as environmentally unfriendly as you like but without this lesser evil you won't ever reach your environmentally friendly goal.


RE: Tesla
By Spuke on 3/11/2008 4:53:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Its hard for companies to push these things when the demand is so low.
For an environmentalist, you sound very reasonable and make very valid and logical points.


RE: Tesla
By mattflaschen on 3/12/2008 4:30:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can't just expect a car company to mass produce hydrogen cars out of nowhere. That would mean taking a HUGE risk of going out of business.


A hydrogen fuel cell is really fundamentally no different from a battery. You still have to "charge" (separate the hydrogen) it somehow, and that requires either electricity or fossil fuels (for instance, natural gas).


RE: Tesla
By dever on 3/11/2008 3:44:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, once cars switch from gas to electric, it will be much easier to implement solar/hydro/wind/nuclear power plants.
Easier? How?

And why is nuclear getting lumped together with its step sisters - Darrel, Darrel & Darrel?


RE: Tesla
By mholler on 3/10/2008 5:10:42 PM , Rating: 3
Your engineering teacher is a bit confused. If the power plants produced the same amount of power at night, when there is less demand, as they do during the day then the frequency would skyrocket and all of our breakers would trip or our electronics would fry. Generators increase and decrease their output based on demand in order to maintain a constant frequency (60 Hz in the U.S.).

If you increase the demand at night by plugging in a bunch of cars, you also increase the amount of fuel needed to produce the energy. However, it is true that power plants produce energy more efficiently and with relatively less emissions than typical internal combustion engines.


RE: Tesla
By mindless1 on 3/11/2008 12:09:31 AM , Rating: 2
I would imagine that what the teacher meant was that the power plant has the capability to produce as much energy at night and yet currently a lower demand at night, so the reserve capacity would be put to this use.


RE: Tesla
By rudy on 3/11/2008 12:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
Power plants use large generators usually they have several ones around here have about 4 per building. The trick is that 1 generator runs most efficiently at a particular speed. Also they cannot be just turned off and on in a split second. So power plants put a fair amount of time into figuring out when to turn off and on how many and what generators. But at night they probably have less running.

Wind and water based power on the other hand is just more like this where you could get power out of them for little extra cost at night but might not be able to use it.

Overall there are advantages to charging at night, and I think that overall its best if we are not pinned down to 1 power source. Although I will be a late adopter I forget to charge my cell phone all the time would hate to wake up and not be able to make it to work. Also getting more gas is easy and portable, if I run out I can walk to a gas station and buy a can and fill it up. I don't know how battery power will work out in those respects.


RE: Tesla
By Spuke on 3/11/2008 4:57:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't know how battery power will work out in those respects.
You'll have to get the car towed OR maybe tow trucks will start carrying big charging units and give you enough juice to get to the next town. I think the hotel industry might see a small boost because of this too. I wonder how much it will cost to get your battery charged by a tow truck?


RE: Tesla
By PrinceGaz on 3/11/2008 1:40:49 AM , Rating: 2
The AC frequency is unrelated to load, it is the voltage which can drop with an unexpected load increase. The loading across the day can be fairly accurately predicted by historical records on power-demand, meaning that peak-load power-stations are only brought on line when needed.

Electric cars are always going to be more efficient than ICE powered ones, because even the worst power-stations are much less polluting and end up much more efficient than an ICE.


RE: Tesla
By QuantumPion on 3/11/2008 9:54:13 AM , Rating: 2
This is incorrect. Supply must equal demand at all times, if there is excess demand, frequency will dip. When this happens, extra peak load generators are brought online. These peak load generators (often natural gas turbines) specifically use the deviation from 60 hz frequency to determine how much extra power to produce.

There is a separate effect of voltage suppression when transmission lines are overloaded and there is insufficient reactive power to meet the demand, but this is a local effect.


RE: Tesla
By EE Pete on 3/11/2008 11:27:13 AM , Rating: 2
"Supply must equal demand at all times, if there is excess demand, frequency will dip."

Agreed. But why will the frequency dip? Aren't the turbines controlled by pressure? I thought the 60Hz standard was directly tied to generator rpm ... 60/s.

I thought if there is an excess load only the amplitude of the voltage would dip. And at some level more generators would come online, spin up to 60Hz and then get connected to the grid.

Am I missing something?